Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25925801›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2015

Six-month outcomes of a Web-based intervention for users of amphetamine-type stimulants: randomized controlled trial.

Robert J Tait, Rebecca McKetin, Frances Kay-Lambkin, Bradley Carron-Arthur, Anthony Bennett, Kylie Bennett, Helen Christensen, Kathleen M Griffiths

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Guideline
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. An epidemic amphetamine problem: commentary on treatment of amphetamine abuse/use disorder.Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences · 2020
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Robert J TaitNational Drug Research Institute, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Australia. robert.tait@curtin.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0648-3093
Australian National University · AUCurtin University · AUUniversity of Newcastle Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of amphetamine-type stimulants (ATS) places a large burden on health services.

objectiveThe aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of a self-guided Web-based intervention ("breakingtheice") for ATS users over 6 months via a free-to-access site.

methodsWe conducted a randomized trial comparing a waitlist control with a fully automated intervention containing 3 modules derived from cognitive behavioral therapy and motivation enhancement. The main outcome was self-reported ATS use in the past 3 months assessed at 3- and 6-month follow-ups using the Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST). Secondary outcomes were help-seeking intentions (general help-seeking questionnaire), actual help seeking (actual help-seeking questionnaire), psychological distress (Kessler 10), polydrug use (ASSIST), quality of life (European Health Interview Survey), days out of role, and readiness to change. Follow-up data were evaluated using an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis with a group by time interaction.

resultsWe randomized 160 people (intervention: n=81; control: n=79). At 6 months, 38 of 81 (47%) intervention and 41 of 79 (52%) control participants provided data. ATS scores significantly declined for both groups, but the interaction effect was not significant. There were significant ITT time by group interactions for actual help seeking (rate ratio [RR] 2.16; d=0.45) and help-seeking intentions (RR 1.17; d=0.32), with help seeking increasing for the intervention group and declining for the control group. There were also significant interactions for days completely (RR 0.50) and partially (RR 0.74) out of role favoring the intervention group. However, 37% (30/81) of the intervention group did not complete even 1 module.

conclusionsThis self-guided Web-based intervention encouraged help seeking associated with ATS use and reduced days out of role, but it did not reduce ATS use. Thus, this program provides a means of engaging with some sections of a difficult-to-reach group to encourage treatment, but a substantial minority remained disengaged.

trial registrationAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12611000947909; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=343307 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6Y0PGGp8q).

Indexed as

AmphetaminesCentral Nervous System StimulantsInternetAdultAmphetamineCognitive Behavioral TherapyFemaleHumansIntention to Treat AnalysisMalePatient Acceptance of Health CareQuality of LifeSubstance-Related DisordersSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultAmphetamineAmphetaminesCentral Nervous System Stimulantsamphetamine-related disorderscognitive therapyInternetintervention studiesrandomized controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID25925801
PMCPMC4430678
OpenAlexW2022556757

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.